Miami Personal Injury Lawyer - FAA

Family’s weekend trip ends in tragedy when Piper Aircraft goes down in the Everglades

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 08:24:53 GMT

Bruce Barber was meticulous when it came to flying.

His business partner, Eric Elliott, described him to the Miami Herald “`It's all about risk management,'' he said. ``You're always preparing for something to go wrong. You want to get everything where it's supposed to be in case you lose power'' and need to land. Mr. Elliott continued: Mr. Barber was ``always ahead of the activity. Every possible piece of gear you could have on a plane, he had,'' including three GPS systems and a storm scope.

Family friend Danny Ponce said of Mr. Barber: “He was a very safe pilot -- very cautious. If there was going to be bad weather, we left earlier or we didn't go. In the last six months, he got a new radar system. He was very fussy about that plane.''

So what went wrong on Sunday, Sept. 20, when the Piper PA-32R Saratoga plunged into the Everglades in Broward County killing Mr. Barber, his wife Karen Chubbuck Barber, son Payton, and family friend Phillip Marsh of Coral Springs?

A Federal Aviation Administration official said Mr. Barber reported engine trouble and called in a “mayday” before communication cut out. But the National Transportation Safety Board (NTS B) may take months to figure out what exactly went wrong.

If there was a manufacturer defect or if there was pilot error on account of Mr. Barber, there may be damages to be gained or a lesson to be learned. But now the moment belongs to mourning a philanthropic, model family and the future of 10-year-old Chloe Barber, the daughter who didn’t make the trip with her parents and brother.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Air Traffic Controller On A Personal Phone Call Just Before the Hudson Crash

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 11:37:00 GMT

Quoting from the the Daily Record, the Chairman of the NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) Deborah Hersman, "...told a congressional committee Wednesday that shortly after the single-engine Piper took off from Teterboro Airport in New Jersey, a Teterboro controller handed off the plane to nearby Newark Liberty International. During the handoff, the controller instructed the Piper pilot to contact Newark and gave him the radio frequency.

Less than a minute after the incorrect readback, the plane collided with an air tour helicopter, sending both aircraft hurtling into the river. All three people aboard the plane and a pilot and five Italian tourists aboard the helicopter were killed."

While recent scruntiy has come over pilot fatigue (especially since the commuter plane crash this summer Buffalo, little has been suggested about air traffic controllers' role in recent crashes. Until now that is.

On Sept. 16, it was reported that the mid-air crash between a small plane and a tourist-toting helicopter over the Hudson River that killed nine could have and should have been prevented. The pilot of the plane read back the wrong radio frequency to an air traffic controller but wasn’t corrected by the controller, a federal safety official said. Meanwhile, other air traffic controllers tried to warn the plane’s pilot that he was approaching the helicopter but couldn’t reach him because they were on different radio frequencies.

It was reported earlier that the air traffic controller was on the telephone at the time of the crash and that the controller’s supervisor also wasn’t in the building, as required, at the time of the Aug. 8 crash, the FAA said in a statement in mid-August. The FAA placed the employees on administrative leave.

Meanwhile, FAA chief Randy Babbitt recently called for the need to “step up professionalism.” He cited the February crash of a Pinnacle Airlines Corp. Colgan unit plane near Buffalo, N.Y., which killed 50 people, and a 2006 accident in Lexington involving Comair with 49 fatalities as examples of inexperienced pilots who didn't follow basic operating standards. “The biggest factor I think for all of aviation is the need to step up professionalism in the workplace,” Mr. Babbitt said in prepared remarks. “It’s definitely there in the vast majority of the aviation workforce, but it’s not uniform throughout the industry.”

What’s clear is that whether its inclement weather, physical damage to the plane, tired pilots, miscommunication with air traffic control or inexperienced pilots, flying is loaded with inherent dangers. One can only hope officials are doing everything to can to make sure every pilot steps up “professionalism” to make sure accidents happen as infrequently as possible.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Pilot Fatigue- FAA is taking notice but are they telling passengers the truth

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 09:38:01 GMT

Federal Aviation Administration head Randy Babbitt says "It's absolutely unsafe to think" that commuter cockpit crews can fly as many hours or stay on duty for as long as pilots who may fly one long-range and execute a single landing route during the same day. In other words, the rules of flying, some of which have been in place for decades, may be wrong. Passengers probably have no awareness that the pilot and crew of their plane may be on their sixth flight of the day.

Keep in mind that before the first of those six flights, the pilots and crew weren’t tucked in a comfortable bed. According the Washington Post, they were packed into a dark “crash” house with several other commuter airline crew trying to get some shut-eye.

Sleep deprivation and fatigue have long been known to be a dangerous factor in flying. In a National Transportation Safety Board safety study of US major carrier accidents involving flight crew from 1978 to 1990, one finding stated: “Half the captains for whom data were available had been awake for more than 12 hours prior to their accidents. Half the first officers had been awake for more than 11 hours. Crews comprising captains and first officers whose time since awake was above the median for their crew position made more errors overall, and significantly more procedural and tactical decision errors."

Studies show exhaustion can impair a pilot's judgment in much the same way alcohol does. Overtired pilots can focus on a conversation or a single chore and miss other things going on around them, including critical flight information.

There are solutions being worked out, but after the advisory committee on pilot fatigue delivered its recommendations to the Federal Aviation Administration late Tuesday, the FAA asked for them not to be made public. The airlines want to schedule some pilots with less-taxing flights — fewer takeoffs and landings — but for longer, not shorter, hours in the cockpit. The unions say they won't agree to more hours for those pilots in exchange for fewer hours for pilots who fly as many as a half dozen short flights a day or take off at odd times.

In the end, the responsibility will fall on many shoulders. Flight crews know their work schedules and it is ultimately their responsibility, like anybody with a job, to come to work ready to go. The FAA needs to put modern, relevant rules in place that jibe with what science and research has shown are the most tiring or non-tiring flights. The airlines have to make tough choices with an eye on their bottom lines of hiring more crews or risk over-taxing existing crews. But passengers, ultimately, may face the choice of paying higher fares to fund the extra crews that may end up saving their lives.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Sound Advice- check the weather report before boarding a plane

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 10:41:35 GMT

As much as we assign blame for airplane crashes on human and mechanical error, Mother Nature often is a large part of the equation.

While Congress rightfully is seeking to improve the way pilots are trained, one of the best ways to avoid an accident may be to check the forecast.

Case in point: An ATR-72 turboprop plane carrying 68 passengers and four crew members slid off the runway on Tuesday at Koh Samui airport in Thailand. The aircraft slammed into an old air traffic control tower, killing Captain Chartchai Punsuwan while his co-pilot remains in a critical condition in hospital. Five passengers suffered serious injuries and two others sustained minor injuries. According to early reports, the plane was attempting to land in a storm, and heavy rain and strong winds may have played a role in the accident.

It’s just one of a string of recent weather-related airplane emergencies. Two people were hurt when a Detroit-bound Delta Air Lines plane ran into severe turbulence and was forced to land in Kentucky.

And at least 28 passengers aboard Continental Flight 128 were injured as the plane flew from Rio de Janeiro to Houston. The flight made an emergency landing in Miami.

Between 1994 and 2003, there were 4,167 weather-related accidents, according to a report by the Federal Aviation Administration’s National Aviation Safety Data Analysis Center (NASDAC). Of those accidents, 1,717 show no record of a weather briefing.

In South Florida, we are accustomed to checking the hurricane map days in advance to see if we need to make preparations for a storm. And anybody with Internet access can get a 5-day weather report. So we know that airlines have the weather information.

The question to be asked is what are the standards for deciding when to try to land and take-off? And are those safety standards being routinely followed or are exceptions made? Given the strong safety records of airlines and the incredibly miniscule chance that an individual will be involved in an airplane accident, are the numbers being played to the detriment of the few? Let’s hope not but just to be certain, check the weather reports before your choose to fly.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Airline Companies: Beware of Public Perception. The Public is Watching, Waiting, All Eyes are on You. It’s No Time to Make a Mistake.

Robert Parks — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 21:38:07 GMT

As I scan the latest news articles and Google alerts, there seems to an influx of stories focused on air travel safety. Could it be the media playing on the devastating Air France Flight 447 – only 50 bodies found, minimal debris recovered and still the French submarine searches for the Black Box beacon signals, which will expire within the week leaving the truth under the ocean.

One story that caught my eye was posted on eTurboNews Federal Aviation Administration administrator Randy Babbit, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, and reps from the airline business met in Washington, D.C. to discuss finding ways for airlines to voluntarily make flying safer.

What are they proposing? It was suggested that the airlines create a manifesto to reassure travelers that “airlines are doing all they can to ensure pilots are beyond prepared to fly passengers to their destinations, and to help more senior pilots mentor those with less experience.”

Babbitt told airline companies today he expects them to do complete background checks on pilots before hiring them to fly passengers -- including getting permission from pilots to access all of their training records.

And the news continues. This weekend I noticed an article in Bloomberg.com about a new satellite system that will provide more detailed weather information for pilots. According to the story, this system has been under development for four years by the FAA and other counterparts around the globe – the satellite-based upgrade will provide real time climate images and data to the cockpit so the pilots can see a storm miles before they reach it.

In the U.S., the proposed technology is called NextGen, for Next Generation Air Transportation System, and is estimated to cost the government as much as $22 billion to develop, according to the FAA. The Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast link, being built by a team led by ITT Corp., is slated to be operational by 2013, according to the FAA Web site. ITT, based in White Plains, New York, is a manufacturer of engineering products and communications systems.

An upgrade to aircraft technology is a hot topic, but so are the pilots that fly the friendly skies. Take the unfortunate mid-flight death of 60-year old pilot Craig Lenell. The Continental Airlines Flight 61 was traveling from Brussels to Newark, NJ when Mr. Lenell suffered a heart attack - the co-pilots took control of the flight with no awareness from the passengers.

This could now lead to questions regarding the qualification of older pilots flying commercial aircraft, but let’s not forget pilot Chesley B. Sullenburger III, 57, who landed the plane in the Hudson River saving the lives of all passengers. Regardless, should there be a limit on the age for pilots flying commercial aircraft? According to the pilot’s wife, Mr. Lenell was in perfect health and had no prior history of heart conditions and never missed his twice-a-year physicals.

Millions of people put their trust in the airlines they choose everyday. Accidents happen. Mistakes are made. But public perception is the key and unfortunately there is no price that will bring back a loved one killed in an air disaster. When the cause is a manufacturing defect, a known danger, a situation that is avoidable, that is when people start to get mad. Too early to feel certain that this is what happened on Air France Flight 447, but I’ve been doing aviation work for 45 years, and folks, the writing is on the wall already.

Finally, the latest in airline crash news: Air France is offering a first advance on compensation for families that lost loved ones – 17,500 euro. For those who don’t have a calculator for a brain, like me, that equals just under $24,000 USD. I wonder if they ask for a release with that. What is your guess?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Robert Parks

Computers Don’t Make Better Decisions Than Humans: New Discoveries From Air France Wreckage As Body Parts Are Found

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 16:58:04 GMT

It has been approximately two weeks since Air France Flight 447 from Rio de Janeiro to Paris crashed into the Atlantic Ocean, and there are still more questions then answers as the search continues for the one device that could illuminate the truth of what happened that fateful night: the cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder.

According to The Christian Science Monitor, which gives a detailed update of Flight 447 and Airbus, the examination of the 49 bodies found indicate that the plane broke into pieces, probably splitting in the middle, while airborne.

Body parts are now being found and examined. They tell their own story. According to the an Associate Press Report posted two hours ago, "autopsies revealed fractures in the legs, hips and arms of Air France disaster victims. Experts said those injuries — and the large pieces of wreckage pulled from the Atlantic — strongly suggest the plane broke up in the air."

Many are still critical of the aircraft itself. It has been reported that Air France has replaced the airspeed censors – known as Pilot tubes – on its entire fleet of Airbus A330 and A340 aircraft; the A330 is considered the most automated plane in the air today. Because the airspeed censors may have been iced over due to the weather, causing erratic airspeed readings to the plane’s computers, this has drawn quite a bit of attention. Whether or not this caused the crash is still unconfirmed. Probably the greatest controversy among experts is the idea that this plane, a relatively “newer” model among carriers, is more electronically dependent than a plane ought to be. This particular model actually blocks the pilots out if electrical switch is down or hit, essentially taking over. There is no recourse for pilots onboard – in essence no manual override. The scare is computers don’t have the judgment of humans, obviously, but in a situation such as this, having the cognizant ability to make decisions based on instinct, rather than a model that is comprised of statistical data is beneficial.

According to Airbus’ CEO Tom Enders, who was defending the aircraft earlier this week: "The AIRBUS record is very, very impressive," he said. "(They have) more than 16 million flight hours, more than 3 million flights and this is so far one of the safest commercial aircraft built. We are supporting the investigation as much as we can and we very much hope that the recorders will be found soon, so that we find out what really happened," Enders said.

Despite the theories and new evidence of body parts found, until the Brazilian military ships, the French submarine, and the two Dutch ships locate that desolate ping beacon miles under the ocean, the fate of Airbus Flight 447 may remain a mystery.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Are Airlines Safe? Or Are There A Whole Lot of Plane Crashes Going On?

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Tue, 19 May 2009 16:58:03 GMT

Within just a few short months we all experienced the Military fighter plane that crashed into a home, the Hudson crash, and more recently, the tragic Colgan Air/Continental Airline's Flight 3407. The back to back media coverage has raised some serious concerns about the safety of commercial air travel. It’s a series of questions that need answers, and sadly, are linked to the down turn in the economy.

It used to be that commercial travel was not only an elegant way to travel, but it was safe. Statistically, airplanes have always been considered safer. The National Travel Safety Board (“NTSB”) keeps records on all commercial plane accidents, regardless of fatalities.

With cut backs in funding and decreased revenues, airlines have cut their staff, their maintenance programs and their inspections. Some airlines have lowered inspections to only those required by the FAA. The cutbacks are showing in the reported crash numbers. While airlines are bound to exercise due care and protect their passengers from injury, the reports of frequent plane crashes is not a coincidence.

The crash of Buffalo’s Flight 3407, which killed 50 people, was originally blamed on ice on the wings. More recently the NTSB Report became available, and its bad news. Pilot fatigue and pilot error (mostly because of lack of training) were the central causes of the crash. Rebecca Shaw, the co-pilot, was paid under $16,000, which has startled Congressional members after hearing testimony of the quality of airline training in commuter type airlines.

USA TODAY reports:

The role of regional airlines has grown. Once considered industry runts, they are now joined at the hip with the big airlines. People who buy a ticket on a major airline often find themselves on a regional carrier for some part of a domestic trip. Passengers often don't even realize they're traveling on two airlines.

Regional airlines account for half of all domestic departures and about one-quarter of the passengers. They are the only scheduled service to about 440 communities.

Witnesses at National Transportation Safety Board hearings this past week said it's possible that many passengers on Flight 3407 the night of Feb. 12 didn't know the plane and its flight crew belonged not to Continental, but Colgan Air of Manassas, Va.

The twin-engine turboprop experienced an aerodynamic stall as it neared Buffalo Niagara International Airport before plunging into a house. All 49 people aboard and a man in the house were killed. Testimony and documents indicate the captain, Marvin Renslow, and co-pilot Rebecca Shaw made a series of critical errors.

NTSB investigators calculated Shaw was paid just over $16,000. Colgan officials testified that captains such as Renslow earn about $55,000 a year. The company later said Shaw's salary was $23,900 and that captains earn about $67,000.

Pilot pay is usually based on the size of the aircraft and a pilot's experience. But the workload and flight schedules at regional airlines are often more demanding than at a major airline, where the planes are larger and make longer but less frequent trips, said Scott Johns, a former Northwest Airlines pilot and air crash investigator.

The President of the Regional Airline association was interviewed, Roger Cohen, and he denied any suggestion that pilots’ inadequate training and experience could be linked to safety. That gives us aviation attorneys some pause.

Whether it’s coincidence, media sensationalism, or simply the “new era” in Washington politics, Congress is finally going to take a look at standards of regional airlines. Congress was already reviewing commercial aircraft standards. Let’s hope Congress takes this seriously. But just in case, like so many other avoidable situations and dangers before, the trial lawyers will be waiting in the wings to hold the industry responsible should they act with disregard to human life.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte